Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of the Claims
The following Office Action is in response to the communications filed on 12/17/2024. Claims 1-6 are currently pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 9/12/2025 has been fully considered and there are no issues with the submission.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
101 Analysis -Step 1 Claim 1 is directed to a moving body and claim 6 is directed to a distance estimation method. Therefore, claims 1, and 6 are within at least one of the four statutory categories.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong 1
Regarding prong 1 of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether they recite subject matter that falls within one of the following groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or c) mental processes.
Independent claims 1 and 6 include limitations that recite an abstract idea (emphasized below). The claims include identical limitations in the form of method, device, system, and computer program so claim 1 will be used as a representation for the rejection.
Claim 1 recites:
A moving body capable of moving through a plurality of different media, the moving body
comprising:
a processor and a memory, wherein the processor
performs wireless communication with an external apparatus;
acquires a transmission path characteristic between the moving body and the external apparatus;
selects a profile corresponding to, among the plurality of different media, a medium in which the moving body is present; and
estimates a distance between the moving body and the external apparatus based on the transmission path characteristic and the profile.
The examiner submits that the foregoing bolded limitations constitute a “mental process” because under its broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers the performance of the limitation in the human mind. For example, “selecting a profile corresponding to…”, and “estimating a distance between…” in the context of these claims encompasses a person looking at data collected and forming a simple judgement. Accordingly, the claim recites at least one abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong 2
Regarding prong 2 of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether the claim, as a whole, integrates the abstract into a practical application. As noted in the 2019 PEG, it must be determined whether any additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea integrate the exception into a practical application in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. The courts have indicated that additional elements merely using a computer to implement an abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity, or generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application.”
In the present case, there are no additional limitations beyond the above-noted abstract idea are as follows (where the underline portions are the “additional limitations” while the bolded portions continue to represent the “abstract idea”):
Claim 1:
A moving body capable of moving through a plurality of different media, the moving body
comprising:
a processor and a memory, wherein the processor
performs wireless communication with an external apparatus;
acquires a transmission path characteristic between the moving body and the external apparatus;
selects a profile corresponding to, among the plurality of different media, a medium in which the moving body is present; and
estimates a distance between the moving body and the external apparatus based on the transmission path characteristic and the profile.
For the following reasons, the examiner submits that the additional limitations do not integrate the above-noted abstract idea into a practical application. Specifically, the step of acquiring a transmission path characteristic between the moving body and the external apparatus amounts to nothing more than mere data acquisition which is a form of an insignificant extra solution activity.
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Further, looking at the additional limitations as an ordered combination or as a whole, the limitations add nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For instance, there is no indication that the additional elements, when considered as a whole, reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to another technology or technical field, apply or use the above-noted judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, implement/use the above noted-judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP 2106.05). Accordingly, the additional limitations do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
101 Analysis Step 2B
Regarding Step 2B of the 2019 PEG, representative independent claim 1 does not include additional elements (considered both individually and as an ordered combination) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons to those discussed above with respect to determining that the claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. As discussed above during the claim 1 analysis, with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements selecting a profile corresponding to a plurality of different media, a medium in which the moving body is present, and estimating a distance between the moving body and the external apparatus based on the transmission path characteristic and the profile amount to nothing more than applying the exception using a generic computer component. Generally applying an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. And as discussed above, the additional limitations are mere insignificant extra solution activities.
Further, a conclusion that an additional element is an insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A should be re-evaluated in Step 2B to determine if they are more than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field. However, in this case there are no additional limitations. MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), and the cases cited therein, including Intellectual Ventures I, LLC v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2016), TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610 (Fed. Cir. 2016), and OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2015), indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network is a well‐understood, routine, and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner. Hence, the claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2-5 do not recite any further limitations that cause the claims to be patent eligible. Rather, the limitations of the dependent claims are directed toward additional aspects of the judicial exception and well-understood, routine, and conventional additional elements that do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Therefore, dependent claims 2-5 are not patent eligible under the same rationale as provided for in the rejection of independent claims 1 and 6.
Therefore, claims 1-6 are ineligible under 35 U.S.C 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20040068371 A1 hereinafter Estep.
Regarding claim 1, Estep teaches a moving body capable of moving through a plurality of different media, the moving body comprising:
a processor and a memory, wherein (In the system 100 in accordance with the invention as depicted in FIG. 1, GPS satellites 110, 112 are shown communicating with a processor system 130 including a GPS receiver 125 carried by a surface vessel 120. Paragraph [0017])
the processor performs wireless communication with an external apparatus;
acquires a transmission path characteristic between the moving body and the external apparatus; (The GPS receiver collects positioning information from the appropriate satellite signal sources and downloads information to computer module 4 (or to processor 12, 12'). The diver or vehicle(s) receiver 3 is temporarily attached to the GPS receiver 1 or surface computer module 4 and a benchmark GPS position is recorded. The diver or vehicle enters the water and begins to move away from the boat. The sonar receiver 3 attached to the diver or vehicle receives a signal from the sonar transmitter 2 and receiver processor 12 makes a distance and direction (to the sonar transmitter 2) calculation that is passed to the secondary processor 12', which preferably resides within the sonar receiver 3, and which further compares and/or combines the benchmark GPS data with the distance and direction data and subsequently derives a corrected set of GPS coordinates corresponding to the position of the diver or vehicle, calculated by an embedded software program 20 that resides on the secondary processor 12'. The secondary processor 12' constantly compares the benchmark GPS data to the distance and direction data that is being processed in the sonar receiver 3 and extrapolates the true GPS position via an algorithm that states: benchmark GPS data+distance (vector)+direction (vector)=actual GPS position, and transports this data with distance and direction data to the output display screen on the sonar receiver. In this manner, the distance and direction to the transmitter as well as the prevailing GPS coordinates are known to the diver or vehicle as they move through the water by virtue of referring to the output display of the sonar receiver or guidance system of an underwater vehicle, allowing navigation to occur by GPS. Paragraph [0023])
selects a profile corresponding to, among the plurality of different media, a medium in which the moving body is present; and ((2) With or without benefit of the calculation offset described in (1) above, acoustic wave propagation speed factors can be incorporated in the distance and direction calculations. As input via the user interface to the Control Software Program, information as to whether the planned dive will occur in fresh water, brackish water or salt water can be entered. Dependent on the selection made, a specific characteristic velocity of propagation table will be employed that is representative of the selected salinity condition. In the case of salt water selection, a table will be utilized that represents a most common encountered composite of salinity conditions (e.g. open ocean, tidal rivers, etc.). If precise salinity conditions are known, as measured by electric resistance or specific gravity measurements, these actual values may be entered via the user interface of the Control Software Program and a more precise table will be utilized during distance and direction calculations. Paragraph [0044])
estimates a distance between the moving body and the external apparatus based on the transmission path characteristic and the profile. ((2) With or without benefit of the calculation offset described in (1) above, acoustic wave propagation speed factors can be incorporated in the distance and direction calculations. As input via the user interface to the Control Software Program, information as to whether the planned dive will occur in fresh water, brackish water or salt water can be entered. Dependent on the selection made, a specific characteristic velocity of propagation table will be employed that is representative of the selected salinity condition. In the case of salt water selection, a table will be utilized that represents a most common encountered composite of salinity conditions (e.g. open ocean, tidal rivers, etc.). If precise salinity conditions are known, as measured by electric resistance or specific gravity measurements, these actual values may be entered via the user interface of the Control Software Program and a more precise table will be utilized during distance and direction calculations. Paragraph [0044])
Regarding claim 2, Estep teaches the moving body according to claim 1. Estep also teaches the system further comprising:
a sensor that measures a surrounding environment state of the moving body; (information as to whether the planned dive will occur in fresh water, brackish water or salt water can be entered. Dependent on the selection made, a specific characteristic velocity of propagation table will be employed that is representative of the selected salinity condition. In the case of salt water selection, a table will be utilized that represents a most common encountered composite of salinity conditions (e.g. open ocean, tidal rivers, etc.). If precise salinity conditions are known, as measured by electric resistance or specific gravity measurements, these actual values may be entered via the user interface of the Control Software Program and a more precise table will be utilized during distance and direction calculations. Paragraph [0044] A more sophisticated variant of this concept introduces a digital thermometer 7 which may be attached, for example, to the Frequency A transmitter and electrically connected to the Surface Computer Module 4 which contains the Control Software Program 11. This Digital Thermometer sends a continuous stream of water temperature measurement results (as it is lowered into position, for example) to the Control Software Program 11 which makes ongoing adjustments to a temperature/propagation table, preferably provided in software 11 that is used for present time calculations paragraph [0046])
wherein the processor determines, based on the surrounding environment state, the medium in which the moving body is present. (information as to whether the planned dive will occur in fresh water, brackish water or salt water can be entered. Dependent on the selection made, a specific characteristic velocity of propagation table will be employed that is representative of the selected salinity condition. In the case of salt water selection, a table will be utilized that represents a most common encountered composite of salinity conditions (e.g. open ocean, tidal rivers, etc.). If precise salinity conditions are known, as measured by electric resistance or specific gravity measurements, these actual values may be entered via the user interface of the Control Software Program and a more precise table will be utilized during distance and direction calculations. Paragraph [0044] A more sophisticated variant of this concept introduces a digital thermometer 7 which may be attached, for example, to the Frequency A transmitter and electrically connected to the Surface Computer Module 4 which contains the Control Software Program 11. This Digital Thermometer sends a continuous stream of water temperature measurement results (as it is lowered into position, for example) to the Control Software Program 11 which makes ongoing adjustments to a temperature/propagation table, preferably provided in software 11 that is used for present time calculations paragraph [0046])
Regarding claim 6, Estep teaches a distance estimation method, comprising:
acquiring, by a moving body capable of moving through a plurality of different media and performing wireless communication with an external apparatus, a transmission path characteristic between the moving body and the external apparatus; (The GPS receiver collects positioning information from the appropriate satellite signal sources and downloads information to computer module 4 (or to processor 12, 12'). The diver or vehicle(s) receiver 3 is temporarily attached to the GPS receiver 1 or surface computer module 4 and a benchmark GPS position is recorded. The diver or vehicle enters the water and begins to move away from the boat. The sonar receiver 3 attached to the diver or vehicle receives a signal from the sonar transmitter 2 and receiver processor 12 makes a distance and direction (to the sonar transmitter 2) calculation that is passed to the secondary processor 12', which preferably resides within the sonar receiver 3, and which further compares and/or combines the benchmark GPS data with the distance and direction data and subsequently derives a corrected set of GPS coordinates corresponding to the position of the diver or vehicle, calculated by an embedded software program 20 that resides on the secondary processor 12'. The secondary processor 12' constantly compares the benchmark GPS data to the distance and direction data that is being processed in the sonar receiver 3 and extrapolates the true GPS position via an algorithm that states: benchmark GPS data+distance (vector)+direction (vector)=actual GPS position, and transports this data with distance and direction data to the output display screen on the sonar receiver. In this manner, the distance and direction to the transmitter as well as the prevailing GPS coordinates are known to the diver or vehicle as they move through the water by virtue of referring to the output display of the sonar receiver or guidance system of an underwater vehicle, allowing navigation to occur by GPS. Paragraph [0023])
selecting, by the moving body, a profile corresponding to, among the plurality of different media, a medium in which the moving body is present; and ((2) With or without benefit of the calculation offset described in (1) above, acoustic wave propagation speed factors can be incorporated in the distance and direction calculations. As input via the user interface to the Control Software Program, information as to whether the planned dive will occur in fresh water, brackish water or salt water can be entered. Dependent on the selection made, a specific characteristic velocity of propagation table will be employed that is representative of the selected salinity condition. In the case of salt water selection, a table will be utilized that represents a most common encountered composite of salinity conditions (e.g. open ocean, tidal rivers, etc.). If precise salinity conditions are known, as measured by electric resistance or specific gravity measurements, these actual values may be entered via the user interface of the Control Software Program and a more precise table will be utilized during distance and direction calculations. Paragraph [0044])
estimating, by the moving body, a distance between the moving body and the external apparatus based on the transmission path characteristic and the profile. ((2) With or without benefit of the calculation offset described in (1) above, acoustic wave propagation speed factors can be incorporated in the distance and direction calculations. As input via the user interface to the Control Software Program, information as to whether the planned dive will occur in fresh water, brackish water or salt water can be entered. Dependent on the selection made, a specific characteristic velocity of propagation table will be employed that is representative of the selected salinity condition. In the case of salt water selection, a table will be utilized that represents a most common encountered composite of salinity conditions (e.g. open ocean, tidal rivers, etc.). If precise salinity conditions are known, as measured by electric resistance or specific gravity measurements, these actual values may be entered via the user interface of the Control Software Program and a more precise table will be utilized during distance and direction calculations. Paragraph [0044])
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Estep in view of US 20190342012 A1 hereinafter Tonolini.
Regarding claim 3, Estep teaches the moving body according to claim 2. Estep also teaches wherein the plurality of different media includes (With or without benefit of the calculation offset described in (1) above, acoustic wave propagation speed factors can be incorporated in the distance and direction calculations. As input via the user interface to the Control Software Program, information as to whether the planned dive will occur in fresh water, brackish water or salt water can be entered. Paragraph [0044])
Estep does not teach wherein the plurality of different media includes air.
However, Tonolini teaches wherein the plurality of different media includes air. (In some implementations of this invention, an end-to-end communication channel includes three components: underwater propagation, the water-air interface, and in-air propagation. Paragraph [0054])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the moving body of Estep to include the use of air as a transmission media of Tonolini. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination because it would enable the system to accurately transmit media regardless of if the device is in the water or the air as suggested by Tonolini in paragraph [0054]
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Estep and Tonolini teach the moving body according to claim 3. Estep also teaches wherein the sensor includes a salinity sensor, and (With or without benefit of the calculation offset described in (1) above, acoustic wave propagation speed factors can be incorporated in the distance and direction calculations. As input via the user interface to the Control Software Program, information as to whether the planned dive will occur in fresh water, brackish water or salt water can be entered. Dependent on the selection made, a specific characteristic velocity of propagation table will be employed that is representative of the selected salinity condition. In the case of salt water selection, a table will be utilized that represents a most common encountered composite of salinity conditions (e.g. open ocean, tidal rivers, etc.). If precise salinity conditions are known, as measured by electric resistance or specific gravity measurements, these actual values may be entered via the user interface of the Control Software Program and a more precise table will be utilized during distance and direction calculations. 3) Temperature of the prevailing waters will introduce a subtle but distinct influence on the propagation speed of the acoustic transmissions. Water temperature measurement results can be manually input into the Control Software Program as an additional offset value to be included in the distance and direction calculations by directing calculation references to a more sophisticated table that represents properties of temperature variations on acoustic wave propagation speed and, if desired, their differences in both salt and fresh water. Paragraphs [0044-0045])
in a case where a salinity measured by the salinity sensor is equal to or greater than a threshold, the determiner determines that the medium in which the moving body is present is the sea water. (With or without benefit of the calculation offset described in (1) above, acoustic wave propagation speed factors can be incorporated in the distance and direction calculations. As input via the user interface to the Control Software Program, information as to whether the planned dive will occur in fresh water, brackish water or salt water can be entered. Dependent on the selection made, a specific characteristic velocity of propagation table will be employed that is representative of the selected salinity condition. In the case of salt water selection, a table will be utilized that represents a most common encountered composite of salinity conditions (e.g. open ocean, tidal rivers, etc.). If precise salinity conditions are known, as measured by electric resistance or specific gravity measurements, these actual values may be entered via the user interface of the Control Software Program and a more precise table will be utilized during distance and direction calculations. 3) Temperature of the prevailing waters will introduce a subtle but distinct influence on the propagation speed of the acoustic transmissions. Water temperature measurement results can be manually input into the Control Software Program as an additional offset value to be included in the distance and direction calculations by directing calculation references to a more sophisticated table that represents properties of temperature variations on acoustic wave propagation speed and, if desired, their differences in both salt and fresh water. Paragraphs [0044-0045])
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Estep and Tonolini teach the moving body according to claim 4. Estep also teaches wherein the profile associates the transmission path characteristic with a distance between communication apparatuses in the medium in which the moving body is present. ((1) As described earlier, the boat Sonar Transmitter 150 is suspended beneath the boat 120 on a calibrated length tether 140. To ensure the maximum of stability of the submersion depth of the transmitter, the transmitter should be weighted if suspended by a rope tether or the tether should be of a stiff composition such as steel or fiberglass. The selected calibrated depth (i.e. 10 feet, 15 feet, etc.) is entered into a configuration set-up utility that is a sub-set of the Control Software Program 11 as a Z axis offset value expressed in feet or meters that demonstrates the actual vertical distance from the GPS Receiver to the actual sonar transmitting device 3, 150. Accordingly, a digital depth gauge 6 is incorporated with the primary processor 12 on the Frequency A or sole frequency Sonar Receiver unit that is attached to the diver or vehicle. When distance and direction calculations are performed utilizing this functional enhancement, distance from GPS Receiver to transmitter and actual depth of diver or vehicle are introduced as off-set values to the calculation. In this case, calculations performed regarding distance and direction from the GPS Receiver to the Frequency A or sole Sonar Receiver can now be expressed in terms of 1) the horizontal distance h rather than D from the Frequency A transmitter to the Frequency A sonar receiver by computing the angle above or below the plane of the transmitter using the difference between the depth information and the calibrated tether length offset, 2) the direction between the Frequency A transmitter to the Frequency A sonar receiver, 3) the difference in depth between the GPS receiver and the Frequency A transmitter, and 4) the difference in depth between the Frequency A transmitter and the Frequency A sonar receiver. In practice, only the offset vertical distance of the GPS Receiver to the tethered transmitter is manually entered via the user interface of the Control Software Program and is downloaded as an offset to the Sonar Receiver that is attached to the diver or vehicle prior to submersion and practical deployment of the system. 2) With or without benefit of the calculation offset described in (1) above, acoustic wave propagation speed factors can be incorporated in the distance and direction calculations. As input via the user interface to the Control Software Program, information as to whether the planned dive will occur in fresh water, brackish water or salt water can be entered. Dependent on the selection made, a specific characteristic velocity of propagation table will be employed that is representative of the selected salinity condition. In the case of salt water selection, a table will be utilized that represents a most common encountered composite of salinity conditions (e.g. open ocean, tidal rivers, etc.). If precise salinity conditions are known, as measured by electric resistance or specific gravity measurements, these actual values may be entered via the user interface of the Control Software Program and a more precise table will be utilized during distance and direction calculations. Paragraphs [0043-0044])
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20160090160 A1 teaches an underwater mobile body that transmits hydrosphere information.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joshua J Penko whose telephone number is (571)272-2604. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8-5 ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Hitesh Patel can be reached at 571-270-5442. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOSHUA JEFFREY PENKO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/Hitesh Patel/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3667
9/28/26
Prosecution Insights